I for one would never want to stifle an individual’s right to speak their mind on political affairs, (even if it is to lend their support to someone who insinuated that the Jewish Senate minority leader was a “sycophantic minion” to the President’s “blatant anti-Semitism“) but I am concerned to see that JFNA has not yet commented publicly on this issue. So before I direct my local federation to earmark my funds exclusively for local needs, I was wondering if you would be willing to confirm publicly that Richard was only speaking for himself on this trip, or if his statements formally represent those of JFNA more widely.

Finally, while I have your attention….

Does the JFNA professional staff or board believe that it’s ok for its representatives or representatives of its local affiliates to express a personal view, based upon one’s analysis of a situation in order to encourage discussion on any topic? Put another way, if Richard were to have voiced support for BDS initiatives to end Israel’s military presence in the areas of Judea & Samaria that are currently not annexed, would that have also been ok?

Thanks so much for your attention and prompt reply,
Russel Neiss
St. Louis, MO

[Editor’s note: eJP reached out to JFNA yesterday for comment on Sandler’s alleged remarks at the recent Jewish Agency board meeting. They did not respond.]

Reader Interactions

Comments

I thought you might like to see the letter written by Richard Sandler on this topic so I have pasted it below. He is a tireless advocate for our community and we are fortunate to have him at the helm of our movement.

I have received some questions about comments I made as part of a panel discussion yesterday at the Jewish Agency Board of Governors meeting.

During that discussion, I expressed my concern about divisions within our community, and noted that we need to listen to people we disagree with and give them a chance. This is something I believe and have written and spoken about over the past several weeks. Different perspectives within the American Jewish community are not new. I have respected the various perspectives expressed by members of the American Jewish community in the past, and I respect them now. I am hopeful that we can learn to listen to one another and learn from one another. I believe we can disagree without being disagreeable.

The comments reported in the press were in response to a question directed to me about David Friedman and reflected my personal view, based upon my analysis of the situation and my personal contact with Mr. Friedman. They were not meant to offend anyone, but rather encourage discussion.

Can you all at JFNA respond to the second part of my letter as well though?

To reiterate, does the JFNA professional staff or board believe that it’s ok for its representatives or representatives of its local affiliates to express a personal view, based upon one’s analysis of a situation in order to encourage discussion on any topic? Put another way, if Richard were to have voiced support for BDS initiatives to end Israel’s military presence in the areas of Judea & Samaria that are currently not annexed, would that have also been ok?

That is a nice note from Mr. Sandler but to whom was it sent and how many people saw it (and what does it actually say)?

Headlines from across the country and in Israel declared “Trump’s Controversial Nominee for Ambassador to Israel Picks Up Major Endorsement”, “Jewish Federations chairman endorses David Friedman for Israel” and “Jewish Federations Bigwig Endorses David Friedman”. Nowhere in any of these (and many other) articles is it suggested that this is a “personal view … not meant to offend anyone, but rather encourage discussion” rather than a ‘Major Endorsement’.

Did Richard Sandler ‘endorse’ David Friedman, creating the impression borne out in these headlines it was tacitly on behalf of JFNA? If not, we should contact these newspapers *immediately* and have them issue retractions to correct this error (I’m happy to contact them on your behalf if you’re busy with other things). If he did endorse Friedman, then his note about the “need to listen to people we disagree with and give them a chance” is somewhat disingenuous, no? And if he did not endorse Friedman but chooses to let the misimpression stand, allowing the media to proclaim one thing while he whispers another then I suggest this is not the kind of “tireless advocacy” our community needs right now, in fact far from it.

It comes as no surprise that Richard Sandler, President of JFNA, is supportive of David Friedman to be the next US Ambassador to Israel. This organization embodies an ideology and philosophy that is out-of-step with that of the majority of Jews in the United States, and so does not represent the voice of “the people”.

What is surprising is the ease with which Richard shared his opinions while in a forum to which he was invited as a representative of JFNA. When JFNA was asked to make a statement condemning the Bannon appointment, Richard was very clear that the organization would not/could not make statements on political appointments. He repeatedly reminded me that this is not the role of JFNA. Hmmmm… somehow that’s either been reassessed or it was just an excuse.

The clarification letter from Richard is, in my view, further excuse-making — consistent with his approach to every conversation I have had with him. It’s not his fault… it’s yours because you’re just not listening right. As a seasoned leader he should know better that his remarks in that forum would be construed to represent JFNA. Maybe he did…

Richard and the leadership of JFNA act as if they inhabit ivory towers that either ignore, or are oblivious to, the grassroots of American Jewry. Richard is out of touch… and as a result, JFNA is becoming more irrelevant by the day. It’s a shame… but there are other options for where people can put their time, money and energy. As a Past President of a local Jewish Federation, I will let my leadership know that my gift is dependant on a refusal to pay dues to JFNA. That organization does not represent me. I urge others to do the same.

After countless conversations with Board Chair Richard Sandler regarding JFNA’s strict policy to stay non-partisan and refusal to endorse or even comment on political appointments, I am completely confused. As another comment pointed out, I wonder if what he says and what he does fall into two different categories? I am also troubled that he has the time and passion to comment on this political appointment while JFNA stays silent regarding the over 100 Bomb Threats called into Jewish Institutions and Community Centers across the country. Where is the leadership?

If JFNA has pledged to be non-committal about issues regarding the Jewis community and this White House how are we to interpret Mr. Sandler’s remarks about the future ambassador? It’s naive for him to believe he can separate himself from the organization particularly on this panel without some type of blowback.

Sandler’s letter is a typical “the dog ate my homework” excuse. What’s really worrying is that a) he doesn’t think that calling other Jews kapos is disqualifying. How can somebody represent american jewry – 75 percent of which is liberal – when he thinks that somebody that attacks his own constituency is a good choice. B) the report of his endorsement was public, his tame clarification was private. Readers of the media still think that JFNa endorsed friedman c) he didn’t deny in his letter that he endorsed friedman or that JFNa does.
Following pressure from jewish groups, the US Congress said that “comparing Jews to Nazis” constituted antisemitism. That’s what friedman did. So the head of the federation movement just endorsed an antisemite as ambassador to israel and hasn’t really retracted or apologized. The only thing left to do is for liberal Jews (I repeat 75 percent) to disengage from the federation movement.

Can there be any further doubt as to why Federation is losing an entire generation of young Jews? I know first hand that people involved with Federation in Philadelphia were dismayed when IfNotNow began showing up at Federation HQ to demand that Federation take a stand against Steve Bannon’s appointment. My understanding is that the feeling at Federation here was that it did not want to “antagonize” the new administration and risk “losing a seat at the table” which might threaten its ability to continue to provide support services for poor Jews. I disagree with that approach, but I took them at their word and gave them the benefit of the doubt.

The endorsement of Friedman by Richard Sandler is a bridge too far, however. The head of the entire Federation movement appears to be endorsing a man who called other Jews “kapos” because they dared to advocate for a two state solution, and the same organization still appears to be unwilling to publicly connect the dots between a campaign that trafficked in antisemitic dog whistling, an administration that continues that practice, that is filled with white supremacists and their enablers and the drastic rise in antisemitic acts that have corresponded to Trump’s rise to power.

What kind of conclusions are young Jews (or any Jews) supposed to draw here? Is supporting the potentially suicidal annexation of the West Bank really more important than ensuring the continuing safety of the American Jewish community? The young Jewish leaders of IfNotNow know the answer and are not afraid to say so out loud. Perhaps Federation will be brave enough to follow their lead before it’s too late. If so, it may still have a shot at reclaiming some moral authority in the eyes of many Jews, particularly our next generation of leaders.

There’s the issue that Russel clearly articulates about the fine/invisible line of personal “perspectives” in a professional, PUBLIC context and then there’s the issue of Sandler’s actual perspective. I just cannot understand how any person of faith can defend Trump/Bannon’s selection of David Friedman in this moment in history. And, I cannot understand why an organization like JFNA, which is supposed to represent a wide spectrum of the Jewish community, would even remotely want to be seen aligning themselves with Friedman, since such a decision alienates a portion of the base they seek to represent.

Primary Sidebar

Join The Conversation

What's the best way to follow important issues affecting the Jewish philanthropic world?
Our Daily Update keeps you on top of the latest news, trends and opinions shaping the landscape, providing an invaluable source for inspiration and learning.